學術產出-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 移工的社會文化適應研究：以在台灣桃園縣和韓國京畿道從事於製造業之泰籍勞工為例
Migrant workers’ socio-cultural adaptation: a comparative study of Thai workers in the manufacturing sector in Taoyuan county, Taiwan and Gyeonggi-do, South Korea作者 曹民根
Cho, Min Kyun貢獻者 馬藹萱
Ma, Ai Hsuan
曹民根
Cho, Min Kyun關鍵詞 外籍勞工
製造業
台灣
韓國
社會文化適應
migrant workers
manufacturing sector
Taiwan
Korea
socio-cultural adaptation日期 2013 上傳時間 2-Dec-2013 17:52:21 (UTC+8) 摘要 當世界邁向21世紀時，跨國人口流動率也隨之提高，具有不同文化背景的團體在日常生活中碰面。台灣和韓國也不例外，兩國皆正邁入多元文化社會當中：目前居留於兩國的外國人已超過總人口的2％，而在外國人口數中，以外籍勞工的數量佔最多比重。為求社會整合，有必要對其作長期的觀察。本研究以居留在韓國京畿道和台灣桃園縣的泰籍勞工為研究對象，透過參與觀察法及質性訪談的方式，試圖探討外勞所經歷的經驗和適應狀況是否會依據其移居國家（台灣與韓國）的不同而有所差異，以及此一差異是否與移入國的政府角色與政策有所關聯，而移入國政府的角色與政策又會產生多大的影響力。本研究的重要發現包括以下幾點：第一，韓國和台灣在外籍勞工引進程序上存在著差異。韓國自2004年開始實行僱用許可制以來，以國對國的引進方式，直接管理並執行僱用許可制，而台灣自引進初期以來，所有引進程序皆委任給市場（人力仲介公司）運作，雖台灣政府在2007年引進直接聘雇制度，但其使用率並不理想；第二，在兩國對外籍勞工之支援政策上也可發現差異。韓國以中央政府為中心，除申訴和諮詢服務以外，還提供語言及文化理解相關講座，而台灣對語文及文化教學等的服務，幾乎都依賴仲介公司或是NGO團體。第三，語言和當地文化了解度在外勞的工廠內與同僚的關係上具有重要的作用。已受過相關教育的在韓泰籍勞工，遷移初期在工廠內同僚關係上，比在台泰勞更活躍，而在台泰勞遷移初期因語言能力的限制而常常感到陌生不安。不過隨著停留期間的增加，兩個集團的差距就變減少；第四，無論語言和文化瞭解度如何，在勞工與管理階層的關係上，工廠的規模是影響互動程度的關鍵因素。整體而言，本研究發現台韓作為移工的移住國，其政府角色與政策對於移工社會文化適應經驗的形成，特別是在移住初期，可以產生明顯的作用力；韓國政府相對於台灣政府來說，在移工引進過程與支援其社會文化適應的組織與政策上的角色與態度較為積極主動，也使得在韓移工在移住初期有較在台移工更正面的適應經驗。此外，移工移住時間與工作組織規模對於移住國政府在移工社會文化適應經驗的影響上，也同時扮演著重要的調節性角色。
As the world marches into the 21st century, the rate of international population movements increases, bringing more people to meet one another. Taiwan and South Korea are not exceptions. At present, these two countries are becoming multicultural societies: the latest data show that foreigners in both societies comprise more than 2% of the total populations, and migrant workers represent the majority within the foreign populations. In order to enhance social cohesion and integration, it is necessary to monitor the impacts brought by this changing demographic composition. Taking the Thai workers in Gyeonggi-do, South Korea and Taoyuan County, Taiwan as comparative cases in study, this research aims at understanding whether and how the receiving government`s role and policies affect migrant workers` experiences of social-cultural adaptation. By employing qualitative research methods and using participant observation as well as in-depth interviews in collecting data, this study generated the following major findings. First, the governments in South Korea and Taiwan both introduced the foreign workers into the local labor markets around the same time but in different ways. Since South Korea established the employment permit system in 2004, the government has directly managed the process and developed the government-to-government dialogue within the system. On the contrary, when the recruitment system was initially introduced in Taiwan, all the procedures were operated by the market, largely the labor agency companies. Although the Taiwanese government introduced the direct employment system in 2007, its utility rate didn’t lead up to the expectation. Second, South Korea and Taiwan have developed disparate supportive policies toward migrant workers. With the cooperation of several central government agencies, Korea provided not only the channel for appeal and consultation services but also trainings to enhance migrant workers` language ability and cultural understanding of the receiving country. In Taiwan, the government leaved such services to private agencies and NGO groups. Third, migrant workers` local language ability and cultural knowledge significantly affected their interaction with colleagues and superiors at the job sites, especially at the early stage of migration. With more comprehensive training and support from the Korean government, Thai workers in South Korea generally were better equipped with local language ability and cultural knowledge and therefore enjoyed more positive experiences interacting with co-workers at work. With limited language ability and little local cultural knowledge, Thai workers in Taiwan were usually aliened from the local society and felt worried during early days of migration. However, the longer migrant workers stay in these two countries, the more similar their social-cultural adaptation experiences become. Fourth, no matter how much migrant workers understand the local language and culture, the organizational scale of their work site (a factory) is a key factor in influencing the style and extent of interaction among migrant workers as well as between migrant workers and the locals.參考文獻 [中文]于宗先，1997，<台灣轉型期中的社會經濟問題>，亞洲研究，第21期，頁162-166。W. Lawrence Neuman著；王佳煌 譯，2002，《當代社會研究法：質化與量化途徑》，台北：學富文化。行政院勞工委員會，2012，<外籍勞工權益維護報告書>。行政院勞工委員會，2013，<外籍勞工權益維護報告書>。胡幼慧，1996，《質性研究》，頁251，台北：巨流。陳向明，2009，《社會科學質的研究》，頁604，台北：五南。蔡明璋，陳嘉慧，1997，<國家、外勞政策與市場實踐：經濟社會學的分析>，《台灣社會研究季刊》，第27號。張啟明，2012,《外籍勞工生活適應與輔導之研究》，臺北：銘傳大學公共事務學系兩 岸關係與安全管理碩士在職專班。[英文]Alexandro Portes and Ruben G. Rumbaut, 1990. Immigrant America : A Portrait. Berkeley: University of California Press,1990Argyle, M, 1969. Social Interaction. London: Methuen.Berry, J. W., Kim, U., Minde & Mok. D, 1987. “Comparative studies of acculturative stress.” International Migration Review, 21:491-511Berry J, 1997.“Immigration，Acculturation, and adaptation.” Applied Psychology: An International Review, 46(1):5-34Bochner, S, 1986. “Coping with unfamiliar cultures: adjustment of culture learning.” Australian Journal of Psychology, 38:347-358Chiswick, 1994, “Performance of immigrants in the United States labor market,” in Herbert Giersch(ed.), Economic Aspects of International Migration, Berlin: Springer Verlag, 95-114Furnham, A. and Li, Y. H, 1993. “The psychological adjustment of the Chinese community in Britain: A study of two generations.” British Journal of Psychiatry, 39: 22-23.Ghaffarian, S, 1987. “The acculturation of Iranians in united States.” Journal of Social Psychology, 127: 565-571.Giersch(ed.). Economic Aspects of International Migration, Berlin : Springer Verlag. 99-114Harris, A.C. and Verven, R, 1996. “The Greek-American acculturation scale: development and validity.” Psychological Report 78:599-610.Granovetter, Mark, 1985. “Economic action and social structure : the problem of embededness.” American Journal of Sociology, 91: 481-510.LaFromboise, T., Coleman, H. L. K., & Gerton, J, 1993. “Psychological impact of biculturalism: evidence and theory.” Psychological Bulletin, 114: 395-412.Massey,Douglas S., Joaquin Arango, Graeme Hugo, Ali Kouauci, Adela Pellegrino, and J Edward Taylor, 1998. World in Motion : Understanding International Migration At the End of the Millenium. Oxford : Clarendon Press.Martin, G., Sabogal, F., Otero-Sabogal, R. & Perez-Stable, E. J, 1987. “Development of a short acculturation scale for Hispanics.” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Science, 2: 21-34. Piore, Michael J., 1979. Birds of Passage: Migrant Labor in Industrial Societies. New York: Cambridge University Press.Portes, Alexandro. 1995. “Economic sociology and the sociology of immigration.” In Alexandro Portes(ed.), Economic Sociology of Immigration : Essays on Networks, Ethnicity, and Entrepreneurship, 1-41. New York: Russell Sage Foundation Oberg, K, 1960. “Cultural shock: adjustment to new cultural environments.” Practical Anthropology, 7(4):177-182Redfield, R, Linton, R, & Herskovits, M, 1936. “Insanity, Memorandum on the study of acculturation”, American Antbropologist 49:701-708Sakamoto, Kimberly and ChangHwan Kim, 2009. “Socioeconomic Attainments of Asian Americans.”, Annual Review of SociologyStone-Feinstein, B. E., and Ward, C, 1990. “Loneliness and psychological adjustment of sojourners: new perspectives on culture shock.” In D. M. Deals, D. Munro, & L. Mann (Eds.), Heterogeneity in Cross-Cultural Psychology, p. 537-547. Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger .Suinn, R.M., Ahuna, C. & Khoo, G, 1992. “The Suinn-Lew Asian self-identity acculturation scale: concurrent and factorial validation.” Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52: 1041-1046.Tajfel, H. & Turner, J, 1986. “The social identity theory of intergroup behavior.” In W. Austin and S. Worchel (Eds), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, Pp. 7-24. Chicago : Nelson Hall Publishers. Troper, Harold, 1999.“Multiculturalism.”In Paul Robert Magocsci (Ed), Encyclopedia of Canada`s Peoples, Pp.997-1006. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Ward, C & Okura, U, 1998. “The U-curve on trial: a longitudinal study of psychological and sociocultural adjustment during cross-cultural Transition.” International Journal Review, 22(3): 227-291.Ward, C. and Kennedy, A, 1993. “Psychological and sociocultural adjustment during crosscultural transitions: A comparison of secondary students at home and abroad.” Intercultural Journal of Psychology, 28:12-147.Ward, C & Kennedy, A, 1999. “The measurement of sociocultural adaptation.” International Jouranal Review, 23(4):659-677.Waldinger, Roger, 1992, “The Making of an Immigrant Niche”, manuscript, Department of Sociology, University of California-Los AngelesZhuoni Zhang and Xiaogang Wu, 2011, Social Change, Cohort Quality and Economic Adaptation of Chinese Immigrants in Hong Kong, 1991-2006, Asian and Pacific Migration Journal 20(1):1-29[韓文] Seok, Hyun-ho，2000， , 韓國人口學第23卷第2號，頁5¬-37。 Lee, tae-jung，2011，《Labour Migration Process and Transformational Identity: Focused on the Experience of Participants for the Migrant Workers Movement in South Korea》, 漢陽大學博士學位論文。Lee, yong-seung， 2012，《韓國的多元文化政策：批判性檢討》， 多元文化社會之瞭解—9種接近，太陽出版社，p221-255。Heo, Mi-yeon，2004， ， 延世大學行政大學院碩士學位論文。Shim, bo-sun，2007，<溫情主義移工政策之形成和變化 : 為韓國多元文化政策之分析> 談論201 10(2)，頁41-76。Choi, geum-hae，2006，《關於與韓國男性結婚的中國朝鮮族女性的韓國生活適應之研 究》，首爾大學大學院博士學位論文。Song, jong-ho，2007，<突破單一民族之幻想而往多元文化主義之轉換世代> ，民族 研究30號: 90-125。Seungbeom Kang, Kabsung Kim, 2012, Socioeconomic Adaptation Process of Korean Immigrants in United States, Journal of the KRSA, 28(1): 19-38.Lee, sung-wo，2002，《國際移動與社會同化》, 首爾大學出版社。Chun, woo-taek，2000，《為了人們的統一》，首爾 : 圖書出版오름.Mike Douglass, 2010, < A Global Householding Perspective on Migration and Social Change in Korea, Japan and Taiwan>, 都市人文學研究第二卷1號車永浩，2008，<為移民者的社會整合之政策方向>。論文發表於「韓國移民學會2008年後期學術大會」，首爾：韓國移民學會。韓國僱用許可系統(EPS), https://www.eps.go.kr/kr/index.html韓國行政安全部，2012，2012年地方自治團體外國人居民現況調查結果。韓國行政安全部，2010，地方自治團體外國人居民支援業務便覽，P 12。韓國統計廳社會統計局僱用統計科，2012,2012年外國人僱用調查結果。韓國法務部，2012，出入國、外國人政策年鑒，P 78。韓國法務部，2012，出入國、外國人政策年鑒，P 80。韓國法務部，2012，出入國、外國人政策年鑒，P 375。外國人居民政策有關部門合同說明會，2012， P 90。安山市政府，2012, 安山市外國人居民支援政策，P 20～23。韓國文化觀光部，2012，外國人、文化多樣性業務計劃及主要案件， P 31 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
社會學研究所
99254021
102資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0992540211 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 馬藹萱 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Ma, Ai Hsuan en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 曹民根 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Cho, Min Kyun en_US dc.creator (作者) 曹民根 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Cho, Min Kyun en_US dc.date (日期) 2013 en_US dc.date.accessioned 2-Dec-2013 17:52:21 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 2-Dec-2013 17:52:21 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 2-Dec-2013 17:52:21 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0992540211 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/62028 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 社會學研究所 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 99254021 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 102 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 當世界邁向21世紀時，跨國人口流動率也隨之提高，具有不同文化背景的團體在日常生活中碰面。台灣和韓國也不例外，兩國皆正邁入多元文化社會當中：目前居留於兩國的外國人已超過總人口的2％，而在外國人口數中，以外籍勞工的數量佔最多比重。為求社會整合，有必要對其作長期的觀察。本研究以居留在韓國京畿道和台灣桃園縣的泰籍勞工為研究對象，透過參與觀察法及質性訪談的方式，試圖探討外勞所經歷的經驗和適應狀況是否會依據其移居國家（台灣與韓國）的不同而有所差異，以及此一差異是否與移入國的政府角色與政策有所關聯，而移入國政府的角色與政策又會產生多大的影響力。本研究的重要發現包括以下幾點：第一，韓國和台灣在外籍勞工引進程序上存在著差異。韓國自2004年開始實行僱用許可制以來，以國對國的引進方式，直接管理並執行僱用許可制，而台灣自引進初期以來，所有引進程序皆委任給市場（人力仲介公司）運作，雖台灣政府在2007年引進直接聘雇制度，但其使用率並不理想；第二，在兩國對外籍勞工之支援政策上也可發現差異。韓國以中央政府為中心，除申訴和諮詢服務以外，還提供語言及文化理解相關講座，而台灣對語文及文化教學等的服務，幾乎都依賴仲介公司或是NGO團體。第三，語言和當地文化了解度在外勞的工廠內與同僚的關係上具有重要的作用。已受過相關教育的在韓泰籍勞工，遷移初期在工廠內同僚關係上，比在台泰勞更活躍，而在台泰勞遷移初期因語言能力的限制而常常感到陌生不安。不過隨著停留期間的增加，兩個集團的差距就變減少；第四，無論語言和文化瞭解度如何，在勞工與管理階層的關係上，工廠的規模是影響互動程度的關鍵因素。整體而言，本研究發現台韓作為移工的移住國，其政府角色與政策對於移工社會文化適應經驗的形成，特別是在移住初期，可以產生明顯的作用力；韓國政府相對於台灣政府來說，在移工引進過程與支援其社會文化適應的組織與政策上的角色與態度較為積極主動，也使得在韓移工在移住初期有較在台移工更正面的適應經驗。此外，移工移住時間與工作組織規模對於移住國政府在移工社會文化適應經驗的影響上，也同時扮演著重要的調節性角色。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) As the world marches into the 21st century, the rate of international population movements increases, bringing more people to meet one another. Taiwan and South Korea are not exceptions. At present, these two countries are becoming multicultural societies: the latest data show that foreigners in both societies comprise more than 2% of the total populations, and migrant workers represent the majority within the foreign populations. In order to enhance social cohesion and integration, it is necessary to monitor the impacts brought by this changing demographic composition. Taking the Thai workers in Gyeonggi-do, South Korea and Taoyuan County, Taiwan as comparative cases in study, this research aims at understanding whether and how the receiving government`s role and policies affect migrant workers` experiences of social-cultural adaptation. By employing qualitative research methods and using participant observation as well as in-depth interviews in collecting data, this study generated the following major findings. First, the governments in South Korea and Taiwan both introduced the foreign workers into the local labor markets around the same time but in different ways. Since South Korea established the employment permit system in 2004, the government has directly managed the process and developed the government-to-government dialogue within the system. On the contrary, when the recruitment system was initially introduced in Taiwan, all the procedures were operated by the market, largely the labor agency companies. Although the Taiwanese government introduced the direct employment system in 2007, its utility rate didn’t lead up to the expectation. Second, South Korea and Taiwan have developed disparate supportive policies toward migrant workers. With the cooperation of several central government agencies, Korea provided not only the channel for appeal and consultation services but also trainings to enhance migrant workers` language ability and cultural understanding of the receiving country. In Taiwan, the government leaved such services to private agencies and NGO groups. Third, migrant workers` local language ability and cultural knowledge significantly affected their interaction with colleagues and superiors at the job sites, especially at the early stage of migration. With more comprehensive training and support from the Korean government, Thai workers in South Korea generally were better equipped with local language ability and cultural knowledge and therefore enjoyed more positive experiences interacting with co-workers at work. With limited language ability and little local cultural knowledge, Thai workers in Taiwan were usually aliened from the local society and felt worried during early days of migration. However, the longer migrant workers stay in these two countries, the more similar their social-cultural adaptation experiences become. Fourth, no matter how much migrant workers understand the local language and culture, the organizational scale of their work site (a factory) is a key factor in influencing the style and extent of interaction among migrant workers as well as between migrant workers and the locals. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論壹、 研究動機及問題意識 ..................................................................................................................... 8貳、 研究問題與研究目的 ..................................................................................................................... 10第二章 文獻回顧壹、 前言 ................................................................................................................................................. 11貳、 移工的定義 ..................................................................................................................................... 11參、 移工形成之脈絡和台灣與韓國的移工引進歷史 ......................................................................... 12肆、 關於遷移者的適應之理論 ............................................................................................................. 18伍、 小結 ................................................................................................................................................. 25第三章 研究方法壹、 研究設計 ......................................................................................................................................... 26貳、 田野與場域 .................................................................................................................................... 26一、 場域 ........................................................................................................................................ 26二、 抽樣 ........................................................................................................................................ 26三、 研究可信度 ............................................................................................................................ 27四、 研究倫理 ................................................................................................................................ 27第四章 台灣和韓國的移工規模及現況壹、 韓國的移工規模和引進程序 ........................................................................................................ 29貳、 台灣的移工規模和引進程序 ........................................................................................................ 33參、 小結 ................................................................................................................................................ 39第五章 台灣和韓國的政府角色與移工支援政策壹、 韓國政府的支援政策 .................................................................................................................... 41一、 中央政府 .............................................................................................................................. 41二、 地方政府 .............................................................................................................................. 49貳、 台灣政府的支援政策 .................................................................................................................. 51一、 中央政府 .............................................................................................................................. 51二、 地方政府 .............................................................................................................................. 53參、 小結 .............................................................................................................................................. 56第六章 資料分析壹、 受訪者介紹及基本資料 .............................................................................................................. 58貳、 兩國移工的適應度探索 .............................................................................................................. 64一、 政府政策 .............................................................................................................................. 65二、 工廠內社會網絡 .................................................................................................................. 76參、 小結 .............................................................................................................................................. 84第七章 結論壹、 結論 ............................................................................................................................................. 86貳、 研究討論 ..................................................................................................................................... 87參、 研究限制 ..................................................................................................................................... 90肆、 政策建議 ..................................................................................................................................... 91參考文獻 ............................................................................................................................................. 92附錄 ........................................................................................................................................................ 96附錄一、 評鑑年度辦理藍領外國人聘僱許可之人力仲介公司評鑑指標 .................................. 96附錄二、 在韓泰國廠工的社會文化適應訪談大綱........................................................................ 97附錄三、 在台泰國廠工的社會文化適應訪談大綱........................................................................100 zh_TW dc.format.extent 5285679 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.language.iso en_US - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0992540211 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 外籍勞工 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 製造業 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 台灣 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 韓國 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 社會文化適應 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) migrant workers en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) manufacturing sector en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Taiwan en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Korea en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) socio-cultural adaptation en_US dc.title (題名) 移工的社會文化適應研究：以在台灣桃園縣和韓國京畿道從事於製造業之泰籍勞工為例 zh_TW dc.title (題名) Migrant workers’ socio-cultural adaptation: a comparative study of Thai workers in the manufacturing sector in Taoyuan county, Taiwan and Gyeonggi-do, South Korea en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) [中文]于宗先，1997，<台灣轉型期中的社會經濟問題>，亞洲研究，第21期，頁162-166。W. Lawrence Neuman著；王佳煌 譯，2002，《當代社會研究法：質化與量化途徑》，台北：學富文化。行政院勞工委員會，2012，<外籍勞工權益維護報告書>。行政院勞工委員會，2013，<外籍勞工權益維護報告書>。胡幼慧，1996，《質性研究》，頁251，台北：巨流。陳向明，2009，《社會科學質的研究》，頁604，台北：五南。蔡明璋，陳嘉慧，1997，<國家、外勞政策與市場實踐：經濟社會學的分析>，《台灣社會研究季刊》，第27號。張啟明，2012,《外籍勞工生活適應與輔導之研究》，臺北：銘傳大學公共事務學系兩 岸關係與安全管理碩士在職專班。[英文]Alexandro Portes and Ruben G. Rumbaut, 1990. Immigrant America : A Portrait. Berkeley: University of California Press,1990Argyle, M, 1969. Social Interaction. London: Methuen.Berry, J. W., Kim, U., Minde & Mok. D, 1987. “Comparative studies of acculturative stress.” International Migration Review, 21:491-511Berry J, 1997.“Immigration，Acculturation, and adaptation.” Applied Psychology: An International Review, 46(1):5-34Bochner, S, 1986. “Coping with unfamiliar cultures: adjustment of culture learning.” Australian Journal of Psychology, 38:347-358Chiswick, 1994, “Performance of immigrants in the United States labor market,” in Herbert Giersch(ed.), Economic Aspects of International Migration, Berlin: Springer Verlag, 95-114Furnham, A. and Li, Y. H, 1993. “The psychological adjustment of the Chinese community in Britain: A study of two generations.” British Journal of Psychiatry, 39: 22-23.Ghaffarian, S, 1987. “The acculturation of Iranians in united States.” Journal of Social Psychology, 127: 565-571.Giersch(ed.). Economic Aspects of International Migration, Berlin : Springer Verlag. 99-114Harris, A.C. and Verven, R, 1996. “The Greek-American acculturation scale: development and validity.” Psychological Report 78:599-610.Granovetter, Mark, 1985. “Economic action and social structure : the problem of embededness.” American Journal of Sociology, 91: 481-510.LaFromboise, T., Coleman, H. L. K., & Gerton, J, 1993. “Psychological impact of biculturalism: evidence and theory.” Psychological Bulletin, 114: 395-412.Massey,Douglas S., Joaquin Arango, Graeme Hugo, Ali Kouauci, Adela Pellegrino, and J Edward Taylor, 1998. World in Motion : Understanding International Migration At the End of the Millenium. Oxford : Clarendon Press.Martin, G., Sabogal, F., Otero-Sabogal, R. & Perez-Stable, E. J, 1987. “Development of a short acculturation scale for Hispanics.” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Science, 2: 21-34. Piore, Michael J., 1979. Birds of Passage: Migrant Labor in Industrial Societies. New York: Cambridge University Press.Portes, Alexandro. 1995. “Economic sociology and the sociology of immigration.” In Alexandro Portes(ed.), Economic Sociology of Immigration : Essays on Networks, Ethnicity, and Entrepreneurship, 1-41. New York: Russell Sage Foundation Oberg, K, 1960. “Cultural shock: adjustment to new cultural environments.” Practical Anthropology, 7(4):177-182Redfield, R, Linton, R, & Herskovits, M, 1936. “Insanity, Memorandum on the study of acculturation”, American Antbropologist 49:701-708Sakamoto, Kimberly and ChangHwan Kim, 2009. “Socioeconomic Attainments of Asian Americans.”, Annual Review of SociologyStone-Feinstein, B. E., and Ward, C, 1990. “Loneliness and psychological adjustment of sojourners: new perspectives on culture shock.” In D. M. Deals, D. Munro, & L. Mann (Eds.), Heterogeneity in Cross-Cultural Psychology, p. 537-547. Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger .Suinn, R.M., Ahuna, C. & Khoo, G, 1992. “The Suinn-Lew Asian self-identity acculturation scale: concurrent and factorial validation.” Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52: 1041-1046.Tajfel, H. & Turner, J, 1986. “The social identity theory of intergroup behavior.” In W. Austin and S. Worchel (Eds), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, Pp. 7-24. Chicago : Nelson Hall Publishers. Troper, Harold, 1999.“Multiculturalism.”In Paul Robert Magocsci (Ed), Encyclopedia of Canada`s Peoples, Pp.997-1006. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Ward, C & Okura, U, 1998. “The U-curve on trial: a longitudinal study of psychological and sociocultural adjustment during cross-cultural Transition.” International Journal Review, 22(3): 227-291.Ward, C. and Kennedy, A, 1993. “Psychological and sociocultural adjustment during crosscultural transitions: A comparison of secondary students at home and abroad.” Intercultural Journal of Psychology, 28:12-147.Ward, C & Kennedy, A, 1999. “The measurement of sociocultural adaptation.” International Jouranal Review, 23(4):659-677.Waldinger, Roger, 1992, “The Making of an Immigrant Niche”, manuscript, Department of Sociology, University of California-Los AngelesZhuoni Zhang and Xiaogang Wu, 2011, Social Change, Cohort Quality and Economic Adaptation of Chinese Immigrants in Hong Kong, 1991-2006, Asian and Pacific Migration Journal 20(1):1-29[韓文] Seok, Hyun-ho，2000， , 韓國人口學第23卷第2號，頁5¬-37。 Lee, tae-jung，2011，《Labour Migration Process and Transformational Identity: Focused on the Experience of Participants for the Migrant Workers Movement in South Korea》, 漢陽大學博士學位論文。Lee, yong-seung， 2012，《韓國的多元文化政策：批判性檢討》， 多元文化社會之瞭解—9種接近，太陽出版社，p221-255。Heo, Mi-yeon，2004， ， 延世大學行政大學院碩士學位論文。Shim, bo-sun，2007，<溫情主義移工政策之形成和變化 : 為韓國多元文化政策之分析> 談論201 10(2)，頁41-76。Choi, geum-hae，2006，《關於與韓國男性結婚的中國朝鮮族女性的韓國生活適應之研 究》，首爾大學大學院博士學位論文。Song, jong-ho，2007，<突破單一民族之幻想而往多元文化主義之轉換世代> ，民族 研究30號: 90-125。Seungbeom Kang, Kabsung Kim, 2012, Socioeconomic Adaptation Process of Korean Immigrants in United States, Journal of the KRSA, 28(1): 19-38.Lee, sung-wo，2002，《國際移動與社會同化》, 首爾大學出版社。Chun, woo-taek，2000，《為了人們的統一》，首爾 : 圖書出版오름.Mike Douglass, 2010, < A Global Householding Perspective on Migration and Social Change in Korea, Japan and Taiwan>, 都市人文學研究第二卷1號車永浩，2008，<為移民者的社會整合之政策方向>。論文發表於「韓國移民學會2008年後期學術大會」，首爾：韓國移民學會。韓國僱用許可系統(EPS), https://www.eps.go.kr/kr/index.html韓國行政安全部，2012，2012年地方自治團體外國人居民現況調查結果。韓國行政安全部，2010，地方自治團體外國人居民支援業務便覽，P 12。韓國統計廳社會統計局僱用統計科，2012,2012年外國人僱用調查結果。韓國法務部，2012，出入國、外國人政策年鑒，P 78。韓國法務部，2012，出入國、外國人政策年鑒，P 80。韓國法務部，2012，出入國、外國人政策年鑒，P 375。外國人居民政策有關部門合同說明會，2012， P 90。安山市政府，2012, 安山市外國人居民支援政策，P 20～23。韓國文化觀光部，2012，外國人、文化多樣性業務計劃及主要案件， P 31 zh_TW
